Sunday, December 11, 2016

Trends are so cliché in photography. There are usually a few Trend Setters that are usually some of the professionals that by the time it has become a trend will have made some really good money with a particular look or style. As the trend washes down to the average photography community it gets so overdone that the look no longer has any special value. We have seen it with HDR, Spot Color, Bleach Bypass and on and on. Don't be a follower, be a leader.Now I do not want to say there is no value in following Trends. You may have clients that want that 'trendy' look. So yes you can still make money from it. But more importantly, learning the new skills required to copy or replicate these trends is of great value. Learning to look at an image and to be able to recognize all the components that make it a specific style and then be able to map out a path to re-create that image or style is ultra valuable. Then, modifying it to blend in with your own style can make you a leader as opposed to a follower.Are you a Judge? If you are a judge, you should check out and learn these trends. And when presented with these images and styles, don't say "Wow, how innovative" but rather recognize how they have been copied. How do they compare to some good examples of some of these trendy images you have researched? Score accordingly.Here is an article on new upcoming trends. Watch how closely it will be copied in the next year. Whats interesting is that within 3 months these trends will already be passé and the originators of these trends will already have moved on....http://www.adorama.com/alc/6-visual-trends-predicted-for-2017?utm_source=slgt&utm_medium=email&utm_term=ALCImages&utm_content=ALCBody&utm_campaign=Email121116ALC

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Photography Judging is one of the arcane arts that always seems to baffle photographers and always raises questions about the validity of judging itself. I have seen incredible images get trashed by judges, simple boring images get praised by judges. I have seen judges trash an image one week and judges praise the same image the next week; ward winning images not even get any good comments and obviously soft images win honorable mentions.Judges and Critics will look at great images and decide it would look better one way or another without properly evaluating the image presented to them. They will criticize an image for not using the ‘rule of thirds’ totally ignoring the fact that divisions on the quarters or fifth are OK. They will cite rules that are not relevant and many seem to make the mistake that rules are absolutes when in reality they are not rules but rather ‘guidelines’. Some judges feel that they are ‘critics’ so therefore they need to ‘criticize’ an image no matter how good it is.How is a photographer supposed to take in all the above information and make any sense of what is required of them to create a good image? Does the judge’s critiquing of images citing all the ‘rules’ crush creativity and cause photographers to create pre-boxed images? Should a photographer try to make sense of any of this and then try to created images that fit into the standards set by ‘judges’. Who are the judges and do they even know what they are talking about? Who are they to trash or praise your images?This all gets confusing and having images critiqued should be a positive experience, not that the critique itself needs to be positive, but rather what you learn from the critique should be positive. Often it is not. Should you even have your images critiqued? Will it help you in your quest to becoming a better photographer?In this series of posts, I will try to make heads and tails of all this. I will discuss the who and what of judging and whether or not you should have your images judged. In clubs, there is always an assumption that your images should be judged, that you will become a better photographer because of it (or will you just be brought in line with the masses?) Should you change your photography to get better marks and critiques or perhaps to win a competition? As an artist, are you selling your soul when you do this?At a presentation a few years ago with Freeman Patterson and a follow-up workshop with him I was able to discuss a lot of these issues with him. In doing so I found out that both he and Andre Gallant use to have their images judged but both quickly stopped doing so as they found that their images changed and became more mainstream. Their images also lost their personality that they had because of how their creativity was stifled. These discussions led me to review my last five years of having my images critiqued, taking the Canadian Association of Photographic Arts (CAPA) Judging Course, becoming a Certified CAPA Judge, doing a lot of Judging and Critiquing, studying art and photography, and then reviewing whether any of this is beneficial or not? The simple question is; Did any of this help out my photography?In this series started with the “Don’t Criticize the Critic”, I hope to answer all your questions. If you have any thoughts on the subject or any questions, please feel free to e-mail me. If you are against having your images critiqued or judged or for it, I would love to hear from you.

Sunday, March 20, 2016

So this was a collaboration image for Suki's Hair Salon in Richmond. I had been asked to provide the lighting for the photographer along with a great team of Hair Colorist, Hair Stylist, Fashion Stylist, MUA and Model (Taryne Allcroft). There were three different outfits and hair looks. After every segment, I got to shoot a few images to record the lighting for my notes. This is one of the images.

Friday, March 11, 2016

Before you trash a photography judge, remember, judges have between 3 to 5
seconds to make several decisions when first presented with an image to be
judged. Sometimes even less.

First they need to have the image create a first impression. This is the impact
stage or the wow factor of the image that can garner extra points. More on
Impact later…. Then a general evaluation of the image is done where overall
qualities are noted including any emotional impact the image may have and then
the image is scanned for flaws or devices that impact the image in other
positive or negative ways. Finally, a score or mark must be given often in
changing scales from 1 to 5, 1 to 10, 5 to 10 and sometimes even with half
marks. I have even had to judge out of 30 and once out of 100.

Judges are even sometimes asked to judge based on Photographers Levels where
the maker’s skills are taken into consideration.

Judges also need to understand Judging Standards or Practices as used by their
federation or world photographic societies. Even something as simple as
understanding that extra points are NEVER given for the effort made to get
an image or for having spent a lot of money getting an image. It's not about
how far you travelled or how much it cost you, it's about the image!
Photographers are not to be rewarded because they climbed a certain mountain or
paid $10,000 dollars to get somewhere remote. A bad or even an average photo of
a rare animal should not score more than average marks. Unfortunately, bad
photos of rare animals often score way too high.

These are the easy parts! These decisions must be made in a fair, educated, and
most importantly in an unbiased way no matter what the image is or what genre
it is.

How does a judge do all this in such a short amount of time?

First and foremost a judge that is capable of doing it in general must be
somewhat accomplished as a photographer themselves. Or at the very least have a
lifetimes knowledge of photography. This often entails years of
photography work, often learning many new and varied skills along the way, and
always includes having seen thousands of images in clubs, galleries, the
Internet, magazines and books. For print competitions a judge should understand
what a ‘good’ silver gelatin print is and what a good digital print is.

At some point in their career these photographers have learned that they have
had to start judging and critiquing their own images. This is usually the point
where these same photographers realize that they need to evaluate most images
they see. The question, “Why do I like this image?” creeps in. Why are my
images not this good? What do I need to do differently to make my images
better? When they see an image they do not like, answering 'Why' they do like
it becomes a powerful learning experience.

When discussing these things during casual critique, experienced photographers
learn not only how to use a vast array of photographic elements and devices and
skills but more importantly how to communicate what they see within an image.
Properly understanding advanced composition elements that are beyond the basic
and dysfunctional “Rules of Composition” while using the appropriate vocabulary
to describe an image without being given much (if any) time is no easy task.

This process needs to be entrenched into the photographer so that the process
of giving the critique becomes natural and requires little effort. Once
the judge struggles with any of these elements, problems ensue. Pauses in
speech, stutter steps, using the wrong vocabulary or incorrect words can cause
the judges skills to be questioned. Worse, errors like guessing incorrectly on
a technique used can be disastrous.

During those learning years accomplished photographers have received critique
and criticism, words of praise and disappointment and then usually at some
point have most likely been asked to give feedback and critique to someone
else's image by friends, family, colleagues and peers. This natural progression
from receiving to giving criticism is usually a long slow.

At this stage in the photographers’ life they may not be ready to judge, but
the foundation for good photographic critique has been laid.

Pushing this long progressive step into a shortened timeline with an
in-experienced photographer that lacks the skills and understanding cannot
possibly result in good, valid, fair, nor consistent results.

What skill might these photographer/potential judges be missing?

First and foremost the actual process of giving formal critique. This process
can be taught and learned and even developed and fine tuned with proper
training and study. A part of this process should include some sort of
etiquette training so that judges are fair and complimentary. Judges should
never bash an image or the photographer no matter how blatant the faults are.
Learning to give tactful positive feedback (called critique) is an art.
Personal people skills are important. The judges critique should be honest but
not brutally honest. It should be fair and encouraging while pointing out any
flaws in a tactful manner.

An excellent understanding of composition (and NO not the 12 basic rules of
photography) is required. It needs to be based on the arts and numerous genres
of photography and even some ethnic art devices. Think Notan, Wabi Sabi,
Gestalt Theory, Art History, Anthropology, Balance, Tension, Minimalism,
Abstract, etc.

The photographic schooling of the judge also plays a factor and becomes evident
when they do not have a more global understanding of photography. Photographers
in clubs, groups and organizations are often guided (or misguided) by what
these organizations decide makes a beautiful or a perfect image. These photographers
and judges from these “schools” often do not understand why images have won 1st
place in National or International competitions. If they lack the basic
understanding of why those images are worthy, how can they be ready to judge
other peoples’ images?

It is very important that the photographer/judges’ basic photographic skills be
perfect. Done. If someone has no understanding of how to create a well
exposed and tack sharp image, how can they judge and understand the virtues of
such images? How can they be tactful and use critique to help a photographer whose
image is not perfect?

Along with a great understanding of the basics a vast knowledge of a lot of the
obscure photographic skills should be available to these potential judges.
Again, how can a judge critique or help a photographer, when they have no
understanding of how an image was created? Without this technical
understanding, how can a judge understand why (and if appropriate) a specific
technique used was helpful (or a detriment) in the creation of the image? Think
Highspeed, HDR, Ultra Long, Stacked Focus, Compositing, etc.

Worse yet, by not understanding new techniques (and new trends), the judge can
make glaring mistakes in the judging process and the judge can also be wowed by
a new and way overused “single button” creative filter that often leads to
mediocre images gaining higher scores that they deserve because the judge “has
never seen anything like it." Again, this is something that happens way
too often in judging circles. Judges need to be up to date on techniques,
styles, genres and trends. Remember that creating a new unique image is art,
copying one is not.

In this day of digital photography editing skills and specifically knowledge of
proper editing and knowledge of what can be done with good editing skills is
paramount. This isn't so important for when photographers exhibit beautifully
edited images but rather when badly edited images are presented. There is
little worse than a judge giving high marks for an image that has blatantly and
badly been edited. (Sample below)

Some of the problems come from old time photographers only having in depth
knowledge of the classic darkroom/film techniques. Some of these judges blatantly
disregard edited images. They are staunch supporters of in-image perfection
that should never be altered in any way. Remember, they are supposed to be
un-biased. I have seen first hand, judges in action that have stated as much
while breaking ties suggesting to the other judges that because an image had
been edited, it should not score as high as a un-edited image. Really? How
about judging an image simply based on the values of the image itself?

Note however this is not exclusive to old timers. There is a large group of
young digital purists that think along these lines also always citing editing
should be limited to what could be done in the darkroom without the actual
knowledge of the wizardry that was done in the darkroom. Think, compositing (yes,
compositing), Dodge & Burn, localized bleaching, toning, multi light
sources, double exposures, filters and other techniques. Think ‘TREE HOUSE’ by
Jerry Uelsmann.

Image shot with film and created in the darkroom by Thomas Barbèy.

Judges need to look beyond the beauty. This goes with the "schooling”
component in that judges should not be guided by specific or classic notions of
beauty. Often, this results in Classically Beautiful images winning over the
most spectacular Journalistic or Street or Abstract Photography. Should the
best ever most perfect Journalistic Image not score higher than an average
beautiful photo? Should the image not be selected because it is not beautiful
even if it has the most poignant and beautiful story to tell?

The last component is emotion. Many judges are not trained or are not even
comfortable talking about emotion. Yet, some of the most powerful images are
very emotional in nature and tell very emotional messages. Should an image not
win or score high because it's not “uplifting?” What about a perfectly
depressing image or an image that makes you angry? Remember, photography is not
about happy or beauty.

So, as easy as it may be to criticize a judge because you do not understand
their decisions, can you say that you put this much thought and process in your
photography when creating your images. Have you laid your biases and schooling
aside? Do you know enough to sit in judgement?

Francois
Cleroux

I
value and welcome comments and suggestions. Please feel free to share your
thoughts with me (good or bad).